The Department of Health's director general for informatics has told CfH suppliers to deliver 'significant progress' by November, and is opening the market for southern hospitals. "We will be working closely with the NHS and our current suppliers to improve the pace of delivery," said Christine Connelly, who has just completed a …
IM&T plan for 2009/10 here:
At least four hospitals intend to implement CSC’s Lorenzo.
Can this be correct?
"But Connelly said that her review had shown her that the core aims and the procurement model of the programme should be retained – the latter because it pays suppliers on successful delivery of working systems"
A government contract that pays for *results* and doesn't reward failure?
Astonishing. And a senior IT Manager who appears to have a set of fair sized spherical appendages to go with it.
Hmmmm, "significant progress by the end of November 2009"?
Could it be that with a General Election due in June next year Ms. Connelly's boss, a certain Mr. G. Brown of 10, Downing Street, wants the CfH white elephant producing some results in the run up to the election?????
"we will move to a new plan"
And, when that happens, presumably the swept-aside suppliers won't get paid, because no one gets paid for delivering something that hasn't performed to contract, right?
Oh, I see. "It doesn't work like that" isn't just for financial services banksters.
"And, when that happens, presumably the swept-aside suppliers won't get paid, because no one gets paid for delivering something that hasn't performed to contract, right?"
Only in the US. And only when said contractor fails to hire a suitable lobbyist (there are about 40 000 in Washington) to grease the right Con-gressman and Sin-ators.
In Blighty HMG follows normal contract rules. Probably with embedded poision pill cancellation clauses.
At the HC2009 keynote, "Our Leader" stated that both Lorenzo and Millenium would act as common platforms from which other software vendors could build upon. What was not clear until she was pushed is that this does not mean these "platforms" would be availble to work with directly, rather that a messaging interface would be provided.
Now if these core systems are feeding into some sort of data warehouse, what each Trust uses as their software backbone becomes less of an issue. But then, why would someone commission a company to develop a system or systems to interface with to all intents and purposes a middle man? The data exists within the walls of the hospital somewhere and it just seems arse backwards that they are looking to put a common interface on disparate closed platforms.
Who in their right mind could develop a system that links through multiple architectures? And that is besides the actual point that Lorenzo is STILL not proven? I found my blood being boiled listening to "Our Leader" speaking to a hall of IT professionals as if they were flaming muppets. There is still too much politics and spin in CfH - I don't care about the right noises...and I feel sorry for the IT underlings of CfH who now have to shift mountains in order to meet the November deadline.
Come November, all we will see is more pain and heartache. I just hope that this iron lady has enough lead in her boots to continue to kick everyone in the backside, but no matter how hard you push a lame donkey, the ass will still drag.
- Tricked by satire? Get all your news from Facebook? You're in luck, dummy
- Feature TV transport tech, part 1: From server to sofa at the touch of a button
- Google straps on Jetpac: An app to find hipsters, women in foreign cities
- Updated Microsoft Azure goes TITSUP (Total Inability To Support Usual Performance)
- The Return of BSOD: Does ANYONE trust Microsoft patches?